[storm] Preliminary Quebec City meeting agenda

<david.black@emc.com> Fri, 01 July 2011 19:23 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.com>
X-Original-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282C39E800C for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qiC7r2H-wQgm for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD659E8008 for <storm@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI02.isus.emc.com []) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p61JNVfT022198 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <storm@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:23:32 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com []) by hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor) for <storm@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:23:16 -0400
Received: from mxhub20.corp.emc.com (mxhub20.corp.emc.com []) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p61JMa0L006159 for <storm@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:22:37 -0400
Received: from mx14a.corp.emc.com ([]) by mxhub20.corp.emc.com ([]) with mapi; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:22:36 -0400
From: <david.black@emc.com>
To: <storm@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:22:34 -0400
Thread-Topic: Preliminary Quebec City meeting agenda
Thread-Index: Acw4JDsUcJvKTmMfT+uuChZDEn0+RA==
Message-ID: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E0589392344@MX14A.corp.emc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [storm] Preliminary Quebec City meeting agenda
X-BeenThere: storm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Storage Maintenance WG <storm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/storm>
List-Post: <mailto:storm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:23:37 -0000

FYI, expect this to be slightly revised next week, Thanks, --David

IETF storm (STORage Maintenance) WG
Meeting agenda (v1)
Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 1710-1810
Quebec City, QC, Canada

Administrivia, agenda bashing, etc. - 10 min
		David L. Black, EMC & Tom Talpey, Microsoft (WG co-chairs)
	Blue sheets
	Note Well

Draft status - 5 min
		David L. Black, EMC (co-chair)
	iFCP update and associated iFCP MIB update - Published as RFCs 6172 and 6173
	MPA update - Publication Requested, AD is processing
	iSCSI drafts (Consolidated, SAM and MIB)
	iSER draft
	RDMA extensions (not currently a WG draft)

iSCSI Drafts (draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-cons-02, draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam-02) - 10 min
		Fred Knight, NetApp & WG co-chairs
	Issues that need attention from WG Last Call (to start in early July), if any
	Status of engagement of iSCSI implementers to review these drafts

iSCSI MIB draft (if needed, status report under "Draft status" above may suffice) - 5 min

iSER draft (draft-ietf-storm-iser-02) - 10 min
		Mike Ko, HuaweiSymantec (on behalf of draft authors)
	Summarize known topics & issues that need attention

RDMA Protocol Extensions Draft (draft-ietf-storm-rdmap-ext-00) - 20 min
		Hemal Shah, Broadcom (on behalf of draft authors)
	NOTE: Despite its filename, this is not an official storm WG draft.

	Discussion of draft contents and rationale.
	Question: Should WG should adopt this draft as a work item.